T
TimothyH
Guest
Priests are not married to the Church.
Marriage is a sacramental union between husband and wife. The Church is not the wife of the priest nor is the priest the husband of the Church.
-Tim-
- Status
Marriage is a sacramental union between husband and wife. The Church is not the wife of the priest nor is the priest the husband of the Church.
-Tim-
V
ValPal
Guest
FWIW, we’re really just talking about secular priests. Religious are different. Religious are effectively “married to their community”…not quite the correct analogy, but their community is their family. There is no reason for them to get married.
T
TimothyH
Guest
Some of us might call that an “Easternization” and politely say no-thanks. The Western Church has 17,000 or so married deacons who can and do serve as that example anway.
As another has stated previously on this thread, the least vocal group in favor of a married priesthood are Western priests themselves. I think the silence is deafening.
-Tim-
V
ValPal
Guest
It must be a local thing. I know plenty of priests that support it, and have stated it as part of their Sunday sermon (at several parishes I’ve belonged to). What you won’t see is priests actively pursuing it; that’s not their function in the Church. It is also not their decision; change comes from the bishops, not the priests.
J
JimG
Guest
This reminds me of a priest who gave a talk about his vocation to a group I attended a few weeks ago. He is a high school chaplain and teacher. His day begins very early with early Mass, and ends very late. There is little time for anything. His workday is more like 12-14 hours rather than a normal workday. If he were married, he would either be a very poor husband or he would neglect his priestly duties.
And it’s not just the fact of being a chaplain that makes it so. My parish priests are always busy. If they had families, the families would be deprived of attention. (I recall a new young priest a few years ago who unaccustomed to the parish schedule, fell asleep during the Mass readings!) Not to mention, of course, that there parish rectory is not designed for families! They would have to buy homes or rent apartments. On a priest’s salary–it’s just not possible. Nor do I anticipate that parishioners would suddenly increase their contributions sufficiently to support not only a priest but his family.
I did know a married priest some years back. He had been an Episcopal priest, and converted to Catholicism. He had a large family, ten children if I recall. His wife went to work for the Diocese. Once at a workshop being given by his wife, the subject of married priests came up. She recommended against it.
And it’s not just the fact of being a chaplain that makes it so. My parish priests are always busy. If they had families, the families would be deprived of attention. (I recall a new young priest a few years ago who unaccustomed to the parish schedule, fell asleep during the Mass readings!) Not to mention, of course, that there parish rectory is not designed for families! They would have to buy homes or rent apartments. On a priest’s salary–it’s just not possible. Nor do I anticipate that parishioners would suddenly increase their contributions sufficiently to support not only a priest but his family.
I did know a married priest some years back. He had been an Episcopal priest, and converted to Catholicism. He had a large family, ten children if I recall. His wife went to work for the Diocese. Once at a workshop being given by his wife, the subject of married priests came up. She recommended against it.
B
bilop
Guest
I a sense, it doesn’t concern current priests. They are either married or not, and that wouldn’t change from any decision on ordaining married men. Holy orders is an impediment to marriage.
The people to ask are men considering a vocation to the priesthood.
God Bless
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
We have married deacons now. Perhaps they can select from married deacons who have served at least 5 years and have proven to be a good candidate to become a priest. If a married deacon has shown that he will make a good priest, I don’t see why the Church will deny him that. You are right, it should be at the discretion of the Bishop.I take a simplistic approach; if a married man wants to become a priest, simply examine it on a case-by-case basis. There are certainly issues associated with having married priests; e.g., a priest with younger children shouldn’t be bounced around to different parishes like and unmarried priest, etc. OTOH, there are benefits. I’d rather see a married priest in pre-Cana, or see a married priest if I needed to be counseled on marital issues (which I don’t, thankfully).
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Changes comes from everyone, it is just the bishops who implement the change. By the way, priests calling for this wouldn’t get any benefit from it, they won’t be able to marry anyway. It would benefit the permanent deacons who can then be ordained as priests.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Except that the married priesthood is a part of Latin tradition. We have had married Popes up until the 6th century.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
If celibacy were optional, I think it’d be obvious that the celibate would be in the vast minority.
Look at the rural Midwest. There are still some old mission Churches that are lumped together and it’s a lot of older folks who live on savings or SS.
A lot of those parishes already are closing because of financial reasons and they can’t drive 20 miles to the next town all the time either.
Eastern Churches have an even bigger problem with anemic birthrates, especially in Russia and Central Europe.
It might be what the West and Japan think they need, but our seminaries in Asia ,Africa and Latin America are full to the brim.
And it’s because priests are called to such standards that they are asked to be celibate.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
I don’t see what is wrong with that. So what if there are less celibates than married priests?
True. But Ukraine has an explosion of priests. The average age of priests in North America is 60, if I remember the report correctly. The average age of priests in Ukraine is 35. They have been turning men away because the seminaries are full. But you are right about the issue of falling birth rates. Here in North America it is hard to support a parish, it is expensive. But people have to do a better job of being missionaries to get more people in the parish. Not for the money, though that is a desired effect, but because it is our mandate as Christians to bring the Gospel to all.
But we have to face the problems that we have in North America. Can’t ride on the success of other places, it doesn’t change the fact of life we have here.
Celibacy and the priesthood are two separate callings. One can be both, but they don’t have to be. One can be celibate and not a priest (like Franciscan brothers), so there is no reason that a priest need be celibate.
E
Exorcist
Guest
Just three quick comments.
First, I don’t think allowing married priests would have a big impact on the shortage of priests. Mainline Protestant fellowships that require formal formation also have clerical shortages – despite married and female ministers.
Second, it would be a very difficult situation for a generation or two to allow married men to become priests on a large scale when there are over 400K worldwide that were not given that option – and could not be given that option given the fact they are already ordained.
Third, I think the impact of a de-facto parish “mother” (the priests’ spouses) would be horribly negative in many parishes. Yes, in some cases it would be great but it many it would be horrible.
First, I don’t think allowing married priests would have a big impact on the shortage of priests. Mainline Protestant fellowships that require formal formation also have clerical shortages – despite married and female ministers.
Second, it would be a very difficult situation for a generation or two to allow married men to become priests on a large scale when there are over 400K worldwide that were not given that option – and could not be given that option given the fact they are already ordained.
Third, I think the impact of a de-facto parish “mother” (the priests’ spouses) would be horribly negative in many parishes. Yes, in some cases it would be great but it many it would be horrible.
T
theistgal
Guest
To a teenage boy (or a male with the maturity of one) anything longer than it is wide is a phallic symbol.
V
ValPal
Guest
I agree that it wouldn’t be big…it would be huge. At least in the U.S.
Simply look at the stats regarding the increase in the number of deacons over the past several decades; it’s very significant. If some of these deacons became priests, I think the shortage would be a thing of the past.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
The married priesthood will not solve the lack of priests, but it will help a bit. And it will address other issues.
Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard
In what way? EC and Orthodox parishes have no problems with our Matushkas.
G
Gorgias
Guest
A practical question for you:
The programs for formation of priests and those for formation of deacons have some considerable differences. At the very least, the time commitment is quite different (around five years part-time for deacons, and 6-8 years full-time for priests). As a result, the formation received is vastly different.
How would we form married men for the priesthood? Would it even be just – let alone practical – to send them away to houses of formation for an extended period of time? If so, how would they provide for their families while in formation? If not, would we really expect men to be in part-time formation for 14-16 years? How would we manage the academic component of formation? (After all, universities tend not to offer evening programs of graduate study in theology!)
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
This is happening a lot with Orthodox priests-in-formation today. Why not take a look at what they are doing? And the requirements for a diocesan priest isn’t that much. A 4-year degree on theology would normally be enough. Those who require longer formation are those who are part of Orders who have vows of celibacy anyway. But diocesan priests only need to complete a 4-year theology course. They can do further studies after that.
Many secular men do studies on the side for their job. I don’t see why it would be a hindrance. Some leave their job and study full time. It is something the husband and wife need to work out themselves. But a lot of Orthodox priests in North America today are converts, but the husband was able to go to seminary to become an Orthodox priest.
B
Burdensome1
Guest
.
.
Actually it was Steve Kellmeyer, another gift to the Church from the Steubenville masters program
that said it, IIRC.
T
TimothyH
Guest
I have to protest this idea in the strongest way.
In the early Church, permanent deacons were exactly that, permanently deacons. For the first 500 years of the Church, the deacon was not a priest-lite, booby-prize or stepping stone to the priesthood. The diaconate was not transitional. The diaconate was considered a unique vocation, valuable in its own right even apart from the priesthood. The idea of rising through the ranks or cursus honorum, was an adaptation of secular roman political and military practices and did much damage to the Church.
The Western Church has specified very clearly that the permanent diaconate is exactly that, a restoration of that which was recognized in the early Church as an authentic and unique vocation in its own right, the call to ordination into service as a permanent state.
Whether my words have an impression on anyone or not, the reality is that the idea of raising married permanent deacons to the priesthood so as to be examples of good, holy married men isn’t going to happen in the Western Church any time soon. Deacons can and are doing that today anyway, and will continue to do so without the need to become priests. The Church did not restore the permanent diaconate after 1000 years of disuse to begin to chip away at its permanence this soon.
At the inquiry meetings I went to, the idea of permanence was explained very clearly, and we were told that a permanent deacon should have no expectation of becomging a priest.
-Tim-
N
NovusAugustus
Guest
I am for the separation of the two vocations, as is already done in our brethren Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches. I am currently praying about a vocation to the priesthood, and while the idea of celibacy honestly doesn’t bother me in the least (In fact, even if celibacy were made optional before I became a priest, I doubt I would try to get married before I did), I can easily see how it would be a great obstacle for many others.
I am also in favor of maintaining the Eastern practice of requiring bishops (and, by extension, the Holy Father) to remain celibate.
In addition, should celibacy ever be made an optional discipline, I am in favor of strict rules concerning divorce and abortion where the wives of the married priests are concerned (i.e., automatic defrocking and/or excommunication for the priests involved (should the priest be found to be the initiating party))
I am also in favor of maintaining the Eastern practice of requiring bishops (and, by extension, the Holy Father) to remain celibate.
In addition, should celibacy ever be made an optional discipline, I am in favor of strict rules concerning divorce and abortion where the wives of the married priests are concerned (i.e., automatic defrocking and/or excommunication for the priests involved (should the priest be found to be the initiating party))
- Status